Local Anesthesia Does Not Block Mustard-Oil-Induced Temporomandibular Inflammation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: Temporomandibular joint (TMJ) disorders and rheumatoid arthritis are two conditions in which neurogenic mechanisms may play a critical role. We investigated the neurogenic contribution underlying acute TMJ inflammation by evaluating effects of local anesthetic blockade of afferent innervation on the development of mustard oil (MO)-induced edema in the rat TMJ area. Groups of eight adult male Sprague-Dawley rats were anesthetized by intraperitoneal alpha-chloralose and urethane. A saline injection into the right TMJ followed by MO (1% to 60%) 6 min later elicited dose-dependent edema development (P < 0.05, repeated measures analysis of variance). Lidocaine (5%) or bupivacaine (0.5%) followed by MO (1% or 40%) did not produce edema development different from saline controls (P > 0.05, repeated measures analysis of variance). The failure of local anesthetic blockade to prevent MO-induced edema is not consistent with MO acting through a neurogenic mechanism, as traditionally perceived. IMPLICATIONS: Inflammation found in temporomandibular disorders and rheumatoid arthritis may result from mediators released by pain-sensing neurons. Local anesthesia failed to block simulated neurogenic temporomandibular inflammation in a rat model, suggesting that functional neuronal input may not be necessary for the promotion of inflammation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".